Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court heard the updated case, now known as Turner II, in late 1996. Acknowledging the cable companies' compelled speech argument, the Supreme Court analyzed the must-carry regulations under the more demanding strict scrutiny analysis to determine if the companies' free speech rights were violated. This time, the Supreme Court ruled ...
Doyle, [3] the Supreme Court established a standard of but-for causation for claims of official retaliation against speech. However, in the 2006 case of Hartman v. Moore, [4] the Supreme Court established an exception for claims of retaliatory prosecution, requiring that a plaintiff show a lack of probable cause for their prosecution. [5]
In India, the Supreme Court case Eastern Book Company & Ors vs D.B. Modak & Anr (where the respondents had compiled CD-ROMs of Supreme Court rulings with text sourced from copyedited publications of them by Eastern Book Company, albeit with copyrightable headnotes and other original content removed) cited both Feist and CCH Canadian ...
Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a "breach of peace" ordinance of the City of Chicago that banned speech that "stirs the public to anger, invites dispute, brings about a condition of unrest, or creates a disturbance" was unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States ...
A written transcript of Wednesday’s oral arguments in Moore v. Harper is now publicly available on the U.S. Supreme Court’s website. The case, named partly for N.C. House Speaker Tim Moore, is ...
Further, the Wisconsin Supreme Court claimed that the law was also unconstitutionally over broad, reasoning that, in order to prove a person selected a victim in the prohibited manner, the state would need to introduce evidence of a person's prior speech. The court thought this would create a "chilling effect" on free speech in general, as ...
The case is also cited for clarifying the potential conflict between the government's interest in protecting audiences and a broadcaster's First Amendment rights, [13] though the Supreme Court's interpretation is sometimes criticized for its inconsistency and inability to adapt to new media technologies or trends in popular content.
These study aids are generally summaries ("briefs") of the cases from the casebook to which it is "keyed," presenting them in the same order as the casebook. Often written by the same author who wrote the associated casebook, and published by the same company, "keyed" study aids are useful in distilling cases down to black-letter law. Popular ...